Dan Baneman

The Buffett Rule Can’t Pay for AMT Repeal

By :: March 15th, 2012

Congress originally enacted the alternative minimum tax (AMT) to make sure that high-income folks would pay at least a minimum amount of income tax. Sound familiar? It seems awfully similar the “Buffett rule,” the principle that those with incomes above $1 million should pay at least 30 percent of their income in taxes. As currently […]

Read More

Not All Taxes on the Rich Are Created Equal

By :: March 14th, 2012

In the face of growing income inequality and big budget deficits, some political leaders and commentators are showing a growing interest in raising taxes on the rich. But the ideas on the table would have very different results. The Tax Policy Center has looked at several plans, including the 28 percent limit on the tax […]

Read More

How Would the Buffett Rule Affect Marginal Tax Rates?

By :: February 14th, 2012

The Paying a Fair Share Act of 2012 (PFSA) – Congress’ first crack at legislating the Buffett rule – would apply a broad-based 30 percent minimum tax for those earning more than $1 million a year. We have a pretty good idea of how this would affect people’s taxes: it would substantially raise them but […]

Read More

Top Income Tax Rates and Revenue: A Historical Perspective

By :: December 1st, 2011

By Dan Baneman and Jim Nunns With election season heating up and 2012 just around the corner, we are hearing a lot about the pending expiration of the Bush-era tax cuts.  If the debate over the original 2010 expiration is any guide, much will center on whether the top rate should increase from 35 percent […]

Read More